9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Ashtana, Member (T)]. Shri A. Vijayaraghavan, ld. Consultant for the appeal in E/167/2000 as well as E/168/2000 submits that the issue involved in both these appeals is common and since he is representing both the appellants, therefore the matter may be taken up together. 2. Ld. DR Shri S. Sudarsan has no objection to taking-up the matters toge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 3A(4) of the C.E. Act, 1944 on the simple ground that they had opted for full and final discharge of duty liability under Rule 96ZO(3) which clearly lays down that the assessment under the said rule would be available subject to the condition that the claim under Section 3A(4) ibid would not be allowed. Ld. Consultant submits that the ratio of the precedent decisions cited above is th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of conflict between the two, as has been held by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in [1992 (61) E.L.T. 440 (Bom.)], therefore the benefit claimed by the appellants under Section 3A(4) of the Act cannot be denied to them on the ground that the rule bars the benefit of the section. We find that in the appeals before us, the impugned orders have similarly denied the statutory benefit under Section 3A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
